Posted on 03/09/2018 5:41:32 AM PST by Oklahoma
Yawn...
No, we can’t agree to that, because American workers and their jobs are not the priority of the bipartisan establishment that is beholden to its corporate donors. [...]
So, if tariffs on unfair steel and aluminum competitors are a bad idea, what is a good idea? How do you propose to solve the problem, and continuing to ignore it is a NO-GO. What is your idea that results in an end state where U.S. manufacturers face exactly the same obstacles to entry into foreigners’ markets as they face entering ours?
[...] If there is a better tactic that will actually achieve the goal of exactly equal footing between our workers and the foreigners, cool. I want to hear it. Tell me exactly what it is. I get tariffs. “You hurt us, we hurt you” – I get that. So do the voters. But if there’s a better idea, let’s hear it. I don’t like tariffs – give us an effective alternative.
But we haven’t heard anything but demands we unconditionally return to the unacceptable status quo, and how the economy is going to collapse because a beer can will cost another penny. Somehow, I am unconvinced about these hypothetical risks. What is not so hypothetical are the devastated communities throughout the Midwest.
THIS!
That seems like the inevitable consequence of a true “free trade” scenario.
We almost had a Civil War in the 1830’s because of tariffs. The North wanted to force the South to buy their goods from northern manufacturers rather than from Britain or France. Cotton farmers were selling tons of cotton to Europeans before the war and many preferred to buy overseas goods in return. Remember the Nullification Crisis?
The founders most certainly did care about the political principles involved with trade and they weren’t all on the same page. To say they were all protectionist is ludicrous. The trade between the states while the Articles of Confederation was in effect is really a separate question but it showed that trade barriers between the states was counterproductive. In fact barriers to trade are nearly always counterproductive.
The steel industry has made over 3 Billion with a B Dollars the past couple of years and isn’t in any financial difficulty. Why do they need help? And before you say it will put steel workers back to work remember that today’s mills have been subject to automation and no longer require the massive amounts of workers it once did.
Your opinion of Goldwater says a lot about your political philosophy.
Ricardo’s Theory of Comparative Advantage discounted wage differentials, but the gap in perceived value of human life is no trifle.
Theoretically we could remove all stateside government intervention in pensions, wages, OSHA, health insurance, etc. (and I will grant that they are too high stateside).
But do we really want to compete with the likes of China in their regard for human rights?
The obvious point he was making is that both income taxes and tariffs are taxes and that to the extent we need to collect revenues, he would prefer that be more by tariffs and less by taxes. I happen to agree with him and no I don't want a pony.
I am generally a Goldwater fan, but promoting some abstract idea of "liberty" at the expense of national sovereignty should be out of the question for anyone who calls himself a conservative.
Amen! The "freedom" of corporate globalists to further fatten their wallets by gutting the American middle class is antithetical to conserving America.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.